Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lick Twist

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sandstein 22:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lick Twist[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not yet notable per WP:BAND. The article is mostly sourced by music blogs and social media, and I don't see significant coverage of them online in WP: Reliable sources. There is this profile in an online magazine which claims 8 million monthly visitors, but that's all I can find online. There's a lot of unsourced and poorly sourced info about them, suggesting WP:COI, though that can be fixed. They've done well on Spotify, and I wouldn't be surprised if they're highly successful in a few years, but for now this is WP:TOOSOON. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:22, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I must agree with the nominator here on how it's too soon for a WP article. This duo has been introduced in genre publications like YourEDM and Impose Magazine but significant coverage has not happened yet. Otherwise only video and stream listings can be found. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Band has quite a lot of coverage across the board. If Wikipedia is going to be Time Magazine and New York Times only, we're going to have to delete a whole lot of articles. Definitely not too soon as this band has been in existence for 3 solid years and is making constant progress, as noted within the references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egrant1102 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OSE -- the "what about other articles" argument is not entirely compelling in this type of deletion discussion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.